Important Results for Superluminal Motion

I will add this diagram to the paper. It shows the generalized gamma factor in dependence of the m(r) values. The curves are parameterized by v/c. gamma can drop below 1 for m(r)>1. It is seen that v/c > 1 is no problem for m theory.

Horst

Am 30.10.2018 um 08:00 schrieb Horst Eckardt:

In the last paragraph of section 3.2 it should read

gamma < 1

instead of

gamma > 1.I will eventually make an update with an additional diagram of the generalized gamma factor.

Horst

Am 30.10.2018 um 06:44 schrieb Myron Evans:

Fwd: Section 3 of paper 417

Many thanks! This is one of the most important sections in the entire UFT series and a close study is highly recommended. It has many points of interest, for example it shows that the spherical spacetime is in itself sufficient to produce force and energy which is not present in flat spacetime and not present in the classical limit. It carefully defines the conditions for infinite energy from m space and for superluminal motion, and numerically develops the method for finding m(r) from astronomy. It is a great advance over the Einsteinian general relativity because it does not use the Einstein field equation. This means that numerical experimental can be carried out with various m(r) functions. Horst’s numerical work also shows that the spin connection must be a consequence of spherical spacetime and cannot be introduced arbitrarily because conservation of energy and angular momentum may be violated. The Einstein field equation restricts m(r) to 1 – r0 / r. This is wholly incorrect because as the famous UFT88 shows, the second Bianchi identity used by Einstein is changed completely by Cartan torsion. The Einstein field equation is based on incorrect, torsionless geometry. By now this is well known and well accepted as shown by nearly fourteen years of accumulated feedback data. Cartan torsion causes frame rotation which produces the spin connection, and frame rotation and m space theories are interlinked numerically in this section. So concepts are rigorously self consistent. It is shown numerically that some m(r) functions give well behaved results, others do not. use is made of m(r) functions that give orbital shrinking. So in summary the use of equations of motion in m space produces results of major importance. The equations of motion are dH / dt = 0 and dL / dt = 0 where H is the hamiltonian and L the angular momentum, the conserved constants of motion of any orbit in the universe, and of m space dynamics in general. This method can also produce retrograde precession, the Einsteinian general relativity cannot. So we have gone suddenly gone far ahead of the standard model in a major paradigm shift.

Section 3 of paper 417This is section 3 with three subsections. I hope all is understandable.

The solution of the m function equations in classical limit will go into paper 418.Horst

Am 29.10.2018 um 18:03 schrieb Myron Evans:

Yes agreed. The velocity of the frame rotation is related to omega by v sub phi = omega r, in the plus or minus direction, and omega is foujnd from the precession

Question for paper 417 To: Myron Evans <myronevans123>

In eq.(61) there is a term v_phi^2 and a term (dr/dt)^2 = v_r^2. Do I

understand it right that v_phi is the velocity of frame rotation which

is predefined, while v_r is the radial velocity component of the orbit.

Then both components are quite differently to handle. Only v_r has to be

determined from the dynamics trajectories.Horst